Brushed Metal and the HIG

Saturday, 16 October 2004

I’ve noticed that there are two entirely different arguments in the
Aqua-vs.-Brushed-Metal debate.

The more common, superficial argument is about personal preference. Some
prefer the way metal windows look, others hate it, and that’s the
argument. You say to-MAY-toe, I say to-MAH-toe.

But the deeper argument against the brushed metal (a.k.a. textured)
theme is simply one of consistency. A large part of the Mac’s historical
usability advantage is that Mac applications all look and feel the same.
Not exactly the same, of course, but certainly within the bounds of a
single “theme”. Most consistent would be a single theme; acceptably
consistent would be a second theme used only under certain well-defined
criteria.

Brushed-metal aficionados often point out that what they like about
metal windows isn’t how they look, per se, but rather how they behave,
in that you can drag metal windows by clicking in any unused space in
the window (as opposed to regular windows, which can only be moved by
clicking in the window title bar). But this behavioral difference makes
things even less consistent — if it’s a good usability idea, all
windows should work like this; otherwise, none should.

Windows have two distinct looks in Mac OS X. There is the
standard default look of windows, as shown in the examples so
far. There is also a brushed metal look available, shown in
Figure 8-11. You can use a brushed metal window if your
application:

Provides an interface for a digital peripheral, such as
a camera, or an interface for managing data shared with
digital peripherals — iPhoto or iSync, for example

Provides a source list to navigate information — for
example, iTunes or the Finder

Don’t use the brushed metal look indiscriminately. Although
it works well for some types of applications, some
applications appear too heavy when using this look. For
example, it works well for the iSync application window (see
Figure 8-11), but it does not work very well for the TextEdit
document window (see Figure 8-12).

Here’s Figure 8-12:

The big problem, obviously, is that Apple has simply ignored the HIG.
The HIG states, “Don’t use the brushed metal look indiscriminately”, but
indiscriminate is precisely the word to describe Apple’s use of it.

Another problem, however, is that the HIG itself contributes to the
conflation of the two arguments — visual appeal vs. consistency. The
HIG should be emphasizing the need for consistency, but with its
discussion of certain apps appearing “too heavy when using this look”,
it validates the notion that developers should just pick the theme that
they think looks better.

The release of Safari was a watershed; it’s an app which fits none of
the HIG’s criteria for when brushed metal is appropriate. You could
perhaps put forth a contorted argument that the “source list” in
Safari’s bookmarks view qualifies it, but that’s a real stretch. It’s
quite obvious that the one and only reason Safari uses brushed metal is
that someone at Apple thinks it looks better that way. (Who the
“someone” is doesn’t really matter to me, but most people think it’s
Steve Jobs.)

What’s interesting about the above figure from the HIG is that the
hypothetical brushed metal TextEdit document window — which is
presented as an example of when not to use brushed metal — is pretty
much exactly what Safari windows look like.

I dredge this up for two reasons:

The HIG ought to be revised to accurately describe Apple’s de
facto policy on the use of the brushed metal theme: that there are
suggestions for when to use it, but that it’s ultimately capricious
and subject to the whims of the developer. Ideally, the brushed
metal theme either wouldn’t exist or would only be used by Apple
when certain well-defined criteria — such as those in the current
HIG — are met. But that’s not so, and is unlikely to change.

The HIG is only credible if it accurately reflects Apple’s actual
policy. If the policy isn’t going to change, then the HIG should.

To those of you who think this state of affairs is just fine, that
there’s no problem with Mac OS X providing two disparate themes for
developers to choose between based on whim, I ask this: If two
themes are OK, why not three or four?